uDevGames 2008

uDev 2004 was one of the biggest coding motivations *ever*
My parents saw how important it was to me and let me live at my computer for 2 weeks I registered 2 hours before the registration deadline, aka 1 week before voting began.

I slept on a mattress I setup 2 feet away from my computer.

I admit I did make last place, but hey, 30 other people dropped out because they didn't have time or motivation.

I would gladly participate in another contest. I would gladly make last place as well.

I would be more likely to participate than in the past, although it would probably be just a half effort. If I do participate, then my preference would also be to have no restrictions on creativity, as others have already said.

Oh man, this would be awesome. I don't have nearly as much free time nowadays, but I'd love to at least enter something.

As for the themes, they're a little too broad to work as restrictions. (At what point do objects with position/velocity become "particles"? Does a simple starfield count as scrolling? Does pathfinding have to be A*? Etc...) It would be more interesting to recognize games that are the best in these categories, and have all of them. So Best Educational Game, Best Sim, Best Use of Particles, Best Use of Scrolling, and Best Use of Pathfinding.

If you want to mix things up, these could result in a bonus point or two added onto the scoring system of uDG. (So voted best gameplay is 5 points, polish 4, graphics/sound/originality 3 each, story 2, as before, but now each Best Of category is, say, 2 bonus points.)

I'm not total opposed to themes, but something like "particles" or "shadows" strike me as not being very useful. Engines that have them built in (e.g. Unity) would seem to give those developers a leg up. Granted, it's all in how they are used, but it still seems a bit unnecessary.

What so we want to accomplish with the themes? If the purpose is to get sample code out there, then engines with a particular feature built-in kind of mess with that. Also, I don't see many posts here asking for sample particle systems code. Most people just want to know how to play a sound, handle certain inputs, work with XCode, get an OpenGL context, get started with for iPhone, that sort of thing... ANY source code we get out there is going to help the community.

More interesting to me are gameplay themes, like the ones at Lost Garden (http://lostgarden.com/). Narrow themes are probably better, here. They stimulate thinking and give a boost to developers who haven't already been working on their game for 2 years before the contest starts... But I also think narrow themes work best for short, frequent contests. That way you get less whining about a particular theme.

Of course, if a cool theme helps us market the contest, or helps us partner with a sponsor to boost the prize pool, that's fine by me. I think the Freeverse and OTEE contest sponsorships in years past worked ok. Others may not agree...

Anyway, I'm not dead set against a theme but so far I haven't seen a compelling reason for one either. If we aren't willing to make it so narrow that it levels the playing field a little, or to accomplish a goal like spur iPhone code samples, then may as well do without.

I also don't like the idea of giving bonus points for themes. Better would be a separate prize entirely for "best educational game" with separate judging criteria. People could choose to apply themselves to that prize if they wanted.

have the comp in multiple stages which mimic the development process. i know there is no standard process, but a general framework would be fine. each step would be 'judged' and points allocated(or something along those lines). but for each step, you must work from a previous step. this would allow not just the developers to contribute.

for instance, most projects i have followed start off with a concept. this could be defined in the game rules or it could be personal interpretations of those rules. carlos mentioned an educational project or simulation that involved particles, scrolling or pathfinding. dependent upon your background and experiences, this could mean tonnes of different concept ideas. the more in-depth/interesting your concept is, the more points you gather. concepts could include story, mechanics, goals etc. the usual stuff.

next could be media assets. sound, image, text, etc. but it must be 'linked to'/'interpreted from' a previous concept. this allows focus on the production of the media which generally makes a finished product look more polished.

it's a tad grey for the next bit. usually it's reconciling the initial plan to be more realistic but in a comp, this may not be necessary or appealing. what would you say goes here?

there could be a second last step which involves the creation of code libraries/frameworks for use in the final products. this code could then be used in more than one finished product. ie a fire particle system, different pathfinding algorithms...?

and then finally the full game could be developed. the thing is, the dev of the final thing may not have been involved at all in the previous steps. you basically provide all the stuff to the dev that usually gets overlooked due to coding, testing, etc.

anyway, ya don't get much for 2 cents these days. any thoughts? how would this be done without taking half a year for all the steps? extreme development? multiple simultaneously staggered comps?

hey osc. do you mind explaining your opinions rather than just stating them as 'fact'? i want to know why waterfall does not work for you? why did you think of waterfall as an analogy of my idea? why wouldn't it help a comp?<- do not take this as me knocking your comment. i'd just appreciate it so i can extend my own opinions/create discussion.

i was thinking more along the lines of helping the community. eg production of assets, educating the masses, allowing a good starting point for the production of mac-quality software etc. or is the general consensus: "we're all in it for the prizes!"?